Ca(2+)/Finding
One finding, on its own
A single claim from the graph, with the evidence strength computed from its study, the sentence it was drawn from, and the paper. This address does not change.
No detected effect on lumbar spine bone mineral density
ModerateEvidence strength: moderate. Human evidence with one recorded weakness, or capped at moderate by its design or by unread numbers.FindingNull result“However, calcium supplementation did not improve the BMD levels at the lumbar spine (0.090, 95% CI: −0.044 to 0.224, p = 0.190) or total hip (0.257, 95% CI: −0.053 to 0.566, p = 0.104) or the BMC level at the total hip (0.116, 95% CI: −0.382 to 0.614, p = 0.648).”
Quoted verbatim from The effect of calcium supplementation in people under 35 years old: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.. - Study
- meta-analysis
- Population
- People aged 35 years or younger in randomised trials of calcium (dietary sources or supplements, some with vitamin D) versus placebo or no treatment, bone density by DXA
The effect of calcium supplementation in people under 35 years old: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.2022PMID:36164828Permalink
Keep reading
- Everything the graph holds on Ca(2+)
- Every compound studied against Lumbar spine bone mineral density
- How to read the evidence strength and the marks
To cite this finding: https://catalystproject.ai/e/01M4QBH129XQ0433PW568M9ADD